Iran Vows Major War Even If US Conducts "Limited Strikes"

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

utterly merciless

Not at all.

With that woman in the bath then quite possibly. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Getting back to the original thread topic,  I would suggest that a lot of what anyone in the Middle East says is for both public consumption and internal blustering.  When the Old Guard in Iran says that "it will respond with major war" and that "The US did not dare strike us because the fear our military capabilities" and "We can strike them and their ships 2,000 kilometers out in the ocean," then that is for public consumption.  I do not place any serious credibility to any of the bluster.  

However, readers may note that all indicators are this this conflict, and I do see it coming, will play itself out without massive land armies going at it - or, for that matter, classic aircraft duels as in WWII. This is headed for "Asymmetric Warfare," where the combatants send in unmanned drones and missiles to taunt and torment each other.  You hit our oil facility, we hit your launch bases and your truck depots, that sort of thing. 

Or, as the Trade Federation leader said to his lieutenant:  "This thing is getting completely out of control!"   [It was in the Star Wars movie] 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

7 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

With that woman in the bath then quite possibly. 

You do realize that that is a commercially available plastic inflatable, don't you?  $89.99 and she is all yours...

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

where the combatants send in unmanned drones and missiles to taunt and torment each other. 

Agreed. More bangy, less shooty. Military practice is my forte.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

I frequently suggest to others to unplug their TV.  

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

so that is my overarching interest, as your Moderator. 

@Grateful55 , I don't believe a word of it. These guys adore the neutrality of MSM and they're all over Facebook and Instagram with their beloved selfie sticks. Can't keep em off that shit. If they are not here, you know what they're doing. 

@Selvedina , have a word with them please.

Also, I notice that in the 'leaderboard' , 2 people can be tied for 1st place, but it's the mod that will take home the gold??!!

WTF is that about?

I will be notifying the relevant authorities. 

 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

7 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Also, I notice that in the 'leaderboard' , 2 people can be tied for 1st place, but it's the mod that will take home the gold??!!

Nope.  Does not work that way.  It is controlled by lines of software code, which does not make the distinction as to Mod or not.  It is programmed that if the follower then equals the leader then the follower takes the pole position of the leader.  (Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you...) 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

out to get you

Hmm. Suspicious.

Software shmoftware.

Edited September 22, 2019 by Guest

[ronwagn + 6,290]

6 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Getting back to the original thread topic,  I would suggest that a lot of what anyone in the Middle East says is for both public consumption and internal blustering.  When the Old Guard in Iran says that "it will respond with major war" and that "The US did not dare strike us because the fear our military capabilities" and "We can strike them and their ships 2,000 kilometers out in the ocean," then that is for public consumption.  I do not place any serious credibility to any of the bluster.  

However, readers may note that all indicators are this this conflict, and I do see it coming, will play itself out without massive land armies going at it - or, for that matter, classic aircraft duels as in WWII. This is headed for "Asymmetric Warfare," where the combatants send in unmanned drones and missiles to taunt and torment each other.  You hit our oil facility, we hit your launch bases and your truck depots, that sort of thing. 

Or, as the Trade Federation leader said to his lieutenant:  "This thing is getting completely out of control!"   [It was in the Star Wars movie] 

So, you do not think that Iran would escalate enough for us to destroy all their military and nuclear sites? You think that their bark is worse than their bite? Probably true until they have nuclear weapons that are reliable. What then? What would President Jan van Eck do?

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

So, you do not think that Iran would escalate enough for us to destroy all their military and nuclear sites? You think that their bark is worse than their bite? Probably true until they have nuclear weapons that are reliable. What then? What would President Jan van Eck do?

I suspect that Iran will continue to take the attitude that, "Hey, if we can't ship and sell oil, nobody else can ship and sell oil."  So you will see more subterfuge and "plausible deniability" in scattered attacks where it hurts Western oil supplies.  The drone and cruise missile raid on the separator and upgrader facility is the new bellweather for attacks:  causes lots of problems, costs lots of money, is spectacular, nobody gets killed, and there is plausible deniability.  Further, the one party that claims ownership of the attack, the Houthis, are not believed.  So, if not them, then who?  And how do you prove it?  Saying some missile was built in Iran means nothing; lots of military stuff gets sold off to third parties.  At this point, Iran has no fingerprints on the missile attacks.  

And since there were no cargo nets strung up to catch a missile in flight you don't have a complete machine, with the software instructions in the electronics telling it what course path to go fly  (from which the definitive launch point could be determined).  

And what would "President" Jan do?  I would punt, that's what! 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

How many of you read the https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Has-Iran-Won-The-War-For-The-Middle-East.html article? 

It brings up some interesting thoughts, but I still have to wonder if it's a neoconservative plant? We do indeed live in interesting times

[fozzir + 68]

10 hours ago, Grateful55 said:

Crude will more then likely be heading up right 

If this article was written 20,10 or even 5 years ago I could see oil prices heading up (more than the couple $ boost after things leveled after this latest incident). Since we (the US) do not need that oil anymore and we can pump and sell as much as we can stand, the impact will be negligible.  This whole thing is about Rouhani and keeping him in check. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, fozzir said:

Since we (the US) do not need that oil anymore

Agreed, that's why I was careful to say volatility haha. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, fozzir said:

more than the couple $ boost after things leveled after this latest incident)

However just read article about repairs, I'll start thread.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

How many of you read the https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/Has-Iran-Won-The-War-For-The-Middle-East.html article? 

It brings up some interesting thoughts, but I still have to wonder if it's a neoconservative plant? We do indeed live in interesting times

Agreed, the article brings up some thought provoking items.

[SERWIN + 749]

On 9/22/2019 at 6:03 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

 

DayTrader, please don't tease the new members here.

Grateful55, I think CNN and most Mainstream Media are disinformation, and I frequently suggest to others to unplug their TV.  

 

I not only unplugged my TV, I got rid of cable/satellite all together. Tired of paying over a hundred a month and can't find anything worth watching on, so I told them all to F**K off and sent their crap back to them. I do have a Roku and I put NewsOn on it for the local news, and by that I mean local traffic and weather.... But I listen and Houston is nothing but shootings anymore, hit & run accidents, dead people found in their cars, etc.